We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparative Study
Journal Article
A multitest regimen of pain provocation tests as an aid to reduce unnecessary minimally invasive sacroiliac joint procedures.
Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2006 January
OBJECTIVE: To compare the diagnostic accuracy of a multitest regimen of 5 sacroiliac joint (SIJ) pain provocation tests with fluoroscopically controlled double SIJ blocks using a short- and long-acting local anesthetic in order to reduce the exposure of patients to unnecessary invasive SIJ procedures.
DESIGN: Prospective, observational study.
SETTING: Hospital setting.
PARTICIPANTS: Sixty patients with chronic low back pain.
INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Visual analog scale score and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve.
RESULTS: Twenty-seven patients responded positively to the blocks, of whom 23 were found positive after the multitest regimen and 4 were negative. For the nonresponders (n=33), these figures were 7 positive and 26 negative. The calculated sensitivity and specificity were .85 (95% confidence interval [CI], .72-.99) and .79 (95% CI, .65-.93), respectively. Positive and negative predictive values were .77 (95% CI, .62-.92) and .87 (95% CI, .74-.99), respectively. The positive likelihood ratio was 4.02 (95% CI, 2.04-7.89); the negative likelihood ratio was .19 (95% CI, .07-.47). The area under the ROC curve was .799.
CONCLUSIONS: The test regimen with 3 or more positive tests is indicative of SIJ pain. It can be used in early clinical decision making to reduce the number of unnecessary minimally invasive diagnostic SIJ procedures.
DESIGN: Prospective, observational study.
SETTING: Hospital setting.
PARTICIPANTS: Sixty patients with chronic low back pain.
INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Visual analog scale score and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve.
RESULTS: Twenty-seven patients responded positively to the blocks, of whom 23 were found positive after the multitest regimen and 4 were negative. For the nonresponders (n=33), these figures were 7 positive and 26 negative. The calculated sensitivity and specificity were .85 (95% confidence interval [CI], .72-.99) and .79 (95% CI, .65-.93), respectively. Positive and negative predictive values were .77 (95% CI, .62-.92) and .87 (95% CI, .74-.99), respectively. The positive likelihood ratio was 4.02 (95% CI, 2.04-7.89); the negative likelihood ratio was .19 (95% CI, .07-.47). The area under the ROC curve was .799.
CONCLUSIONS: The test regimen with 3 or more positive tests is indicative of SIJ pain. It can be used in early clinical decision making to reduce the number of unnecessary minimally invasive diagnostic SIJ procedures.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Diagnosis and Management of Cardiac Sarcoidosis: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2024 April 19
Essential thrombocythaemia: A contemporary approach with new drugs on the horizon.British Journal of Haematology 2024 April 9
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app